THE EVOLUTION OF HOME ENTERAL NUTRITION (HEN) IN POLAND DURING FIVE YEARS AFTER IMPLEMENTATION: A MULTICENTRE STUDY.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: home enteral nutrition (HEN) is the best option for chronic. patients without the ability to swallow, but with intact digestive tract. Despite the increasing use of home enteral tube feeding (HETF), there is little published information about the types of patients receiving home enteral nutrition. The purpose of this paper to present the evolution of HETF. MATERIAL AND METHODS: the retrospective multicenter observational study was performed using questionnaires, which were distributed among the biggest Polish HEN centres. The study covered all patients treated between January, 2007 and January, 2014. RESULTS: in total 196 adult patients in 2008 (M:104. F: 92, mean age 58.1 [41-75]) and 2842 in 2013 (M: 1541, F: 1301, mean age 61.4 range: 1-91) were assessed. The number of patients grew significantly between 2008 and 2013 (p < 0.05), rising from 196 up to 2 842 (and 1 716 at the moment of study). The predominant primary disease was neurology in both time periods, but the profile switched from neurovascular to neurodegenerative (p > 0.05). Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy was the most common GI access ( > 60%), its use and the use of gastrostomies increased significantly since 2008 (p < 0.05). Although the reimbursement for HETF started in 2007, HEN centres expressed doubts about unclear rules for the qualification to HEN and its use. CONCLUSIONS: HETF is a safe, well-tolerated and cost-effective procedure. The profile of patients and techniques may vary at the beginning, but becomes similar to other HETF countries relatively soon. The number of patients grows quickly, and that fact suggests that the prevalence of HETF is similar in all countries.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".